[citation][nom]azraa[/nom]On the contrary, mate.Their engineers have actually good ideas, which can of course be improved.There has been a lot of tinkering in this site about how Bulldozer can be tweaked and it showed A LOT of potential. Now, AMD needs to implement these kind of modifications. Their modular architecture is brillian IMO.No, on the contrary, they need better management. Better paid engineers, better publicists, better financial advisors, better PR, etc.I like to see heads roll within AMD, they have been watching everything crumble and done nothing for years. If they were kept there, it would only have continued their downfall.Lets expect the best for the red team and their new batch of leading personnel.Cheers![/citation]
Their modular architecture may seem brilliant to you, but as an engineer myself Bulldozer seems like a solution in search of a problem. Bulldozer is a CISC implementation of a RISC architecture that was briefly used and subsequently abandoned by a now defunct electronics company.
Silicon modularity really isn't all that it's cracked up to be. Intel managed to source over 150 different Sandybridge chips across the desktop, mobile, embedded, workstation, and server markets from only 5 different silicon blueprints. Intel's chips are "modular" in the sense that faulty parts can be selectively disabled for yield and marketing purposes.